lodging-intelligence

Capabilities

capabilities

Read-onlyIdempotent

Versiunea serverului MCP tria.ro, tool-urile publicate și VOCABULARUL complet, structurat: tokeni (interfața standard pentru intenții/facilități/experiențe/stil), teme (filtre avansate pe 4 piloni) și criterii (semnale avansate de ranking). Toate cu slug+etichetă, ca să ceri exact fără să ghicești și fără să confunzi axele. Plus ce e rezervat.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`tools`	No
`server`	No
`version`	No
`rezervat`	No	Parametri planificați, încă inactivi
`resources`	No	Resurse dereferențiabile prin resources/read (template-uri), unde există. Hărțile statice generate nu sunt expuse.
`rezolutie`	No	Cum se citește câmpul `rezolutie` din rezultate
`vocabular`	No
`updated_at`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 25, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / resources / description

Previous value: -"Resurse dereferențiabile prin resources/read (template-uri). Clienții care citesc template-uri (ex. Claude) le pot citi direct; pe ChatGPT folosește get_map (bytes inline) ca fallback."New value: +"Resurse dereferențiabile prin resources/read (template-uri), unde există. Hărțile statice generate nu sunt expuse."

Changed1 schema field changedAug 11, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / vocabular / properties / tokeni / items / properties / negabil

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Poate fi trimis cu minus, ex. cultura-, pentru absența tokenului real de caracter",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedAug 3, 2026
- removedOutput schema / properties / vocabular / properties / criterii / items / properties / litoral
```
Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Doar pe litoral",
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
```

Changed4 schema fields changedJul 12, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / vocabular / properties / arhetipuri

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Cum se citesc arhetipurile/tokenii din rezultate",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / vocabular / properties / model

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Semantica vocabularului",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / vocabular / properties / nume

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Ce acceptă `nume`",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedOutput schema / properties / vocabular / properties / tokeni

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Vocabular public standard pentru agenți; tokenii interni ai catalogului nu sunt expuși.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "input": {
+        "description": "Poate fi trimis în find_accommodations(tokeni)",
+        "type": "boolean"
+      },
+      "label": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "slug": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}

First observedJun 27, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the response structure (three vocabulary axes with slug+label format and 'plus ce e rezervat'). No contradiction with annotations - a read-only metadata tool is fully consistent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single dense sentence with the key info (version, tools, vocabulary) front-loaded, followed by useful structural detail on the three vocabulary groups. The phrasing is a bit run-on with metaphorical flourish, but every clause earns its place and nothing is redundant.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter discovery tool with annotations covering safety and an output schema present, the description is quite complete - it documents the vocabulary axes and their roles. Minor vagueness in 'plus ce e rezervat' (unclear what 'reserved' refers to), but this is negligible for a metadata tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has 0 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description appropriately focuses on return content (vocabulary structure) rather than params, which adds meaning for how the returned data should be used when invoking sibling tools.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific deliverable: server version, published tools, and the complete structured vocabulary (tokeni, teme, criterii) each with slug+label. This is clearly a bootstrap/discovery tool, and it is obviously distinct from the sibling travel-action tools (find_accommodations, show_map, etc.), so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The rationale is implied strongly - 'ca să ceri exact fără să ghicești' (so you can ask exactly without guessing) signals this is the vocabulary reference to consult before making requests to other tools. No explicit when/when-not statement or named alternatives, but the context is clear enough given the siblings are all domain actions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All lodging-intelligence tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?